https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437861 The Tribunal clarified its jurisdiction to review decisions on 'provisional release' under section 110A of Customs Act, 1962. It determined that the restrictive prescription in the Foreign Trade Policy did not apply to the goods in question, leading to the unjustified seizure. Emphasizing that customs officers lack authority to assess food product fitness, it directed reliance on specific authorities. Resolving discrepancies in test reports, the Tribunal mandated provisional release upon furnishing a bond. It underscored the Customs Act's limitations on health determinations and prohibitions, ordering release within ten days. en-us Wed, 10 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 May 2023 08:46:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437861 The Tribunal clarified its jurisdiction to review decisions on 'provisional release' under section 110A of Customs Act, 1962. It determined that the restrictive prescription in the Foreign Trade Policy did not apply to the goods in question, leading to the unjustified seizure. Emphasizing that customs officers lack authority to assess food product fitness, it directed reliance on specific authorities. Resolving discrepancies in test reports, the Tribunal mandated provisional release upon furnishing a bond. It underscored the Customs Act's limitations on health determinations and prohibitions, ordering release within ten days. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 10 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437861